I like how everyone conveniently forgets that Walmart managers decided to allow the people to get what they wanted on Walmart's dime (the government only pays $50 per transaction in instances like this). Lots of FUD.

Actually, if I were governor, I'd be punishing both sides. It appears that the rule states that the cards are limited to fifty dollars in the event of a system malfunction. I can see the cashiers ringing stuff, but pretty quickly it should have been apparent to management what was going on. They chose to let people do it though, since hey, a sale is a sale. I don't know how much it would hurt, but how about revoking certain stores participation in the program? Like they do when they catch bodegas trading food stamps for cigarettes.

And on the other hand, people should know that in the event of a major cluster dark, you don't get to keep the money that was erroneously given to you. Have your paycheck direct deposited? Guess what, if the payroll people or the bank make an oopsie with a decimal point they actually have a short window of a couple days to debit the extra money right back out of your account. Get a bank statement that says you have a billion dollars? You'd better cash out and move to Bolivia before they catch on and correct it. This is a classic case of people seeing an error and thinking it means "Hey, free money!" and frankly, they should know better. It's really as dishonest as noticing a cashier giving you a twenty back in change instead of a five and not correcting them.

TheDirtyNacho:Gentoolive: walrusonion: As someone who works 40/hrs a week and pays taxes but begrudgingly still had to get EBT (a whole $86 dollars a month) I am very happy these scumbags are getting punished.

When the govt sends you that refund check every year, that is not "paying taxes"

JuicePats:lockers: The punishment for abusing the system is to starve peoples kids. This makes people happy? Meanwhile all those companies who did not follow policy gets a pass? Man you guys are cruel and greedy.

manimal2878:keiverarrow: Honestly, that whole situation seemed to me like a staged incident. when the EBT system went down, whose call was it to let everyone just have whatever they wanted? The cashiers should have said no. Someone approved that mess higher up the chain, and I believe that was done to create an anti-poor political climate

success

According to the article, if the card system goes down reatailers are suppossed to limit the purchase to $50. For some reason they chose not to. Anything over $50 in my mind is really on them.

Heh. If Jindal is smart, that should be his next move...ask for repayment from the stores that violated the 50 dollar rule. No repayment, banned from the system.

gilgigamesh:Anne.Uumellmahaye: Ugh. On one hand GOOD.On the other hand a lot of those people are going to have families and now we've got a gaggle of children who won't have food at home for the month.On a third hand if my mom did something that lost us our grocery money, then tough shiate, figure it out yourself.On a fourth hand my mom had the know-how to be able to procure food for her family, the sense of sacrifice to go without for herself to be able to feed her children, and wasn't raised in a culture that taught her to be dependent on and expectant of others to meet basic needs.On a fifth hand my comment now has five hands and is turning into a scary mutant and I'm sure I've pissed off 1,000 people with my Mutant Five-Handed Comment Monster.

This isn't a clear cut issue, I believe.

It is pretty clear cut. The people pushing this already thought the lazy poors should be left to starve. This just gives them the excuse they needed.

It's a vast conspiracy for those with wealth to want to stop giving it away with nothing in return? What sick planet do you live on where this that's expected?

HeadLever:Tigger: What do you think all those desperate starving people will do when they lose their assistance forever?

Move to North Dakota and get a real job?

. . .because people who can't even afford food to eat can afford to move their entire family across the country to another state and get work in an industry where they have no experience or training, with no guarantee of work once they got there.

Just for a little perspective, I wonder how many people who work at Walmart are shoved off onto the food stamps and Medicaid system because their employer doesn't pay a living wage, and cuts hours to less than full time, so they aren't eligible for health insurance?

I am not condoning this EBT free-for-all thing, but nor will I condone the nation's largest private employer stealing from all of us.

lockers:JuicePats: lockers: The punishment for abusing the system is to starve peoples kids. This makes people happy? Meanwhile all those companies who did not follow policy gets a pass? Man you guys are cruel and greedy.

Wal-Mart lost a shiatton of money on the deal.

okay, so yeah, I guess they will finally train their staff better.

It was Walmart upper management that made the decision. They rolled the dice and lost. I'd be willing to bet they figured they would be paid for the overages and everything would be copacetic.

FitzShivering:walrusonion: As someone who works 40/hrs a week and pays taxes but begrudgingly still had to get EBT (a whole $86 dollars a month) I am very happy these scumbags are getting punished.

I have a few friends on EBT who were pretty damned furious when they saw this. Though it may have been because they want carts full of more groceries, too ;)

I still can't decide what I think on it. Obviously stealing is bad, mmkay, but if they loaded up on, say, a basket full of fresh vegetables and fruits for their kids, I'm inclined to say, "Can we foot the bill on this one?"

Granted, from the pictures, which may have not even have been from the incident, that didn't appear to be the case.

That's my thinking, too. If they used the cards to buy food items that maybe they couldn't have normally afforded (like macadamia nuts), then that's different than purchasing early Christmas presents and flat screen TV's.

ka1axy:manimal2878: keiverarrow: Honestly, that whole situation seemed to me like a staged incident. when the EBT system went down, whose call was it to let everyone just have whatever they wanted? The cashiers should have said no. Someone approved that mess higher up the chain, and I believe that was done to create an anti-poor political climate

success

According to the article, if the card system goes down reatailers are suppossed to limit the purchase to $50. For some reason they chose not to. Anything over $50 in my mind is really on them.

Heh. If Jindal is smart, that should be his next move...ask for repayment from the stores that violated the 50 dollar rule. No repayment, banned from the system.

um .. they aren't paying Walmart jack shiat are you even reading the farking article?

unreasonable ass:It was reported that Walmart should have allowed only $50 to be purchased by any person. Walmart made the decision to not stop people from using the EBT system while it was down. The result is Walmart reportedly isn't being paid for their losses.

I have mixed feelings about this .. on one had, it isn't the kids fault that their parents are trying to loot the stores (did you see the aftermath, it was terrible), but it will be the kids who ultimately suffer.

that being said, if Walmart had told EBT customers "sorry the EBT system is down, no food for you" then we would be reading about how much Walmart hates poor people.

Walmart hates poor people though, so they should have just not let them use the EBT cards, they would be money ahead now.

No, they should have said "sorry, the system is down; $50.00 worth of food for you." Walmart simply didn't feel like participating in the program correctly, I'm thinking, because they'd thought the state would reimburse their losses, and they'd get a windfall day from all their customers empting the store.

If they are willing to work and don't have a Thug's attitude, they could do exacty that. They would not have to move the family up right away, but after some time when they could actually afford it. And you don't have to be a rig worker to get a job there. Everything from housing, truck drivers, general service, janitorial, and even burger flipping is in very high demand.

Sim Tree:unreasonable ass: It was reported that Walmart should have allowed only $50 to be purchased by any person. Walmart made the decision to not stop people from using the EBT system while it was down. The result is Walmart reportedly isn't being paid for their losses.

I have mixed feelings about this .. on one had, it isn't the kids fault that their parents are trying to loot the stores (did you see the aftermath, it was terrible), but it will be the kids who ultimately suffer.

that being said, if Walmart had told EBT customers "sorry the EBT system is down, no food for you" then we would be reading about how much Walmart hates poor people.

Walmart hates poor people though, so they should have just not let them use the EBT cards, they would be money ahead now.

No, they should have said "sorry, the system is down; $50.00 worth of food for you." Walmart simply didn't feel like participating in the program correctly, I'm thinking, because they'd thought the state would reimburse their losses, and they'd get a windfall day from all their customers empting the store.

Or they saw that they were outnumbered by screaming, angry people, and took the submissive approach. Which would you do? Tell someone with 12 carts full of stuff, along with hundreds of other people doing the same thing, that NO, they can't have it? Management didn't want their people killed. You can bet that people wouldn't take the news that they had to put everything back very well.

I was trying to create a sarcastic post that attributed this move to Jindal's obeisance to his WalMart puppetmasters, but discovered that nothing I could come up with sounded nutty enough to be beyond what a real WalMart/Jindal hater would say.

HairyNevus:ferretman: [imokaywiththis.jpg]Me three (or 18th or whatever). I worked at a grocery store for 2.5 years, and EBT users were the most self-entitled brats you could possibly serve. Not every EBT user was, but of the worst customers (especially the repeat offenders) 95% were also EBT users. Basic things like telling them prepared meals weren't food-stampable would lead to a hissy fit where I would get threatened and by the time my boss showed up, they'd just key in the override and run away. Therefore, the fit was rewarded and an unlawful precedent was made. Funny thing was, I really liked working there, but EBT customers killed it for me.

Anytime a boss overrides you doing your job the way you are trained is demoralizing. I blame your old boss more than the EBT frauds. The frauds act like that because of managers who are over pleasing customers. The weirdest exchange I have seen was after a black lady was called on her bs, a black female manager went over to tell her to cut her crap out. The irate customer lost all face when she called the manager racist. I about died laughing. The manager looked like she was going to slap the customer.

Khazar-Khum:Sim Tree: unreasonable ass: It was reported that Walmart should have allowed only $50 to be purchased by any person. Walmart made the decision to not stop people from using the EBT system while it was down. The result is Walmart reportedly isn't being paid for their losses.

I have mixed feelings about this .. on one had, it isn't the kids fault that their parents are trying to loot the stores (did you see the aftermath, it was terrible), but it will be the kids who ultimately suffer.

that being said, if Walmart had told EBT customers "sorry the EBT system is down, no food for you" then we would be reading about how much Walmart hates poor people.

Walmart hates poor people though, so they should have just not let them use the EBT cards, they would be money ahead now.

No, they should have said "sorry, the system is down; $50.00 worth of food for you." Walmart simply didn't feel like participating in the program correctly, I'm thinking, because they'd thought the state would reimburse their losses, and they'd get a windfall day from all their customers empting the store.

Or they saw that they were outnumbered by screaming, angry people, and took the submissive approach. Which would you do? Tell someone with 12 carts full of stuff, along with hundreds of other people doing the same thing, that NO, they can't have it? Management didn't want their people killed. You can bet that people wouldn't take the news that they had to put everything back very well.

I can see that. From the images I saw, it was basically a looting situation.

Deedeemarz:Those desperate starving people won't actually starve. Their kids will eat at school and the after school program or church or whatever, and they will continue to make it like they always have. Because I can guarantee you that the criminals who committed this crime have been fleecing the system a long time. This wasn't their only revenue stream. It is a sad situation for the honest people who get a bad rap due to assholes like this though. At least since the idiots who committed the crimes are easily ID'd, the honest folks shouldn't be impacted. These people need to take responsibility for their actions. What they did was wrong. It really is that simple. And if they commit crimes to make up for their lost benefits, well they have already proven they have are criminals so what is the surprise there?

Your posts are so full of hatred and vitriol. If I were religious, all I would be able to say is "I'm praying for you"

cc_rider:Just for a little perspective, I wonder how many people who work at Walmart are shoved off onto the food stamps and Medicaid system because their employer doesn't pay a living wage, and cuts hours to less than full time, so they aren't eligible for health insurance?

keiverarrow:Honestly, that whole situation seemed to me like a staged incident. when the EBT system went down, whose call was it to let everyone just have whatever they wanted? The cashiers should have said no. Someone approved that mess higher up the chain, and I believe that was done to create an anti-poor political climate

success

It said in the article the policy is to limit purchases on all cards to $50. The stores ignored it and let people shop as much as they wanted.

TheDirtyNacho:No, they should have said "sorry, the system is down; $50.00 worth of food for you." Walmart simply didn't feel like participating in the program correctly, I'm thinking, because they'd thought the state would reimburse their losses, and they'd get a windfall day from all their customers empting the store.

Or they saw that they were outnumbered by screaming, angry people, and took the submissive approach. Which would you do? Tell someone with 12 carts full of stuff, along with hundreds of other people doing the same thing, that NO, they can't have it? Management didn't want their people killed. You can bet that people wouldn't take the news that they had to put everything back very well.

I can see that. From the images I saw, it was basically a looting situation.

Absolutely. They called in cops to try and maintain order when the system came back up.

keiverarrow:Honestly, that whole situation seemed to me like a staged incident. when the EBT system went down, whose call was it to let everyone just have whatever they wanted? The cashiers should have said no. Someone approved that mess higher up the chain, and I believe that was done to create an anti-poor political climate

success

The unlimited cards were an error, not someone's call to remove all limits. Policy is to allow a person to purchase up to $50 worth of food if there is an EBT malfunction. Walmart should have stuck to this limit, so they are partially to blame for the near riot that followed. That's in addition to a bunch of dishonest people who are used to getting something for nothing so had no moral or ethical issues with taking more.

Haven't read the threads yet, but initial thoughts are that the people affected are going to blame anyone and everyone (except for themselves), some people are going to defend those affected "because of the children", and yet some others are going to argue that there should not be any consequences for committing fraud/theft.

Rawhead Rex:Here's a CRAZY idea...These lazy, poor people should get jobs and stop milking off people like me, who already have a job and pay taxes so these deadbeats can have free stuff.Or...Die, die, die.

Or they saw that they were outnumbered by screaming, angry people, and took the submissive approach. Which would you do? Tell someone with 12 carts full of stuff, along with hundreds of other people doing the same thing, that NO, they can't have it? Management didn't want their people killed. You can bet that people wouldn't take the news that they had to put everything back very well.

Misch:Deedeemarz: Those desperate starving people won't actually starve. Their kids will eat at school and the after school program or church or whatever, and they will continue to make it like they always have. Because I can guarantee you that the criminals who committed this crime have been fleecing the system a long time. This wasn't their only revenue stream. It is a sad situation for the honest people who get a bad rap due to assholes like this though. At least since the idiots who committed the crimes are easily ID'd, the honest folks shouldn't be impacted. These people need to take responsibility for their actions. What they did was wrong. It really is that simple. And if they commit crimes to make up for their lost benefits, well they have already proven they have are criminals so what is the surprise there?

Your posts are so full of hatred and vitriol. If I were religious, all I would be able to say is "I'm praying for you"

cc_rider: Just for a little perspective, I wonder how many people who work at Walmart are shoved off onto the food stamps and Medicaid system because their employer doesn't pay a living wage, and cuts hours to less than full time, so they aren't eligible for health insurance?

Politifact rated a claim of this point as "Mostly true". $1,000 / employee, but that is based on a study from 2004, and things may have changed.

Here's a more recent study:

Low Wages at a Single Wal-Mart Store Cost Taxpayers about $1 Million Every Year

Khazar-Khum:Or they saw that they were outnumbered by screaming, angry people, and took the submissive approach. Which would you do? Tell someone with 12 carts full of stuff, along with hundreds of other people doing the same thing, that NO, they can't have it? Management didn't want their people killed. You can bet that people wouldn't take the news that they had to put everything back very well.

Walmart sells guns and ammo. I see a solution to the rampaging farktard problem right there.

cc_rider:Misch: Deedeemarz: Those desperate starving people won't actually starve. Their kids will eat at school and the after school program or church or whatever, and they will continue to make it like they always have. Because I can guarantee you that the criminals who committed this crime have been fleecing the system a long time. This wasn't their only revenue stream. It is a sad situation for the honest people who get a bad rap due to assholes like this though. At least since the idiots who committed the crimes are easily ID'd, the honest folks shouldn't be impacted. These people need to take responsibility for their actions. What they did was wrong. It really is that simple. And if they commit crimes to make up for their lost benefits, well they have already proven they have are criminals so what is the surprise there?

Your posts are so full of hatred and vitriol. If I were religious, all I would be able to say is "I'm praying for you"

cc_rider: Just for a little perspective, I wonder how many people who work at Walmart are shoved off onto the food stamps and Medicaid system because their employer doesn't pay a living wage, and cuts hours to less than full time, so they aren't eligible for health insurance?

Politifact rated a claim of this point as "Mostly true". $1,000 / employee, but that is based on a study from 2004, and things may have changed.

Here's a more recent study:

Low Wages at a Single Wal-Mart Store Cost Taxpayers about $1 Million Every Year

That is a myopic view of the economy. It works because it rejects the premise that the employer is a taxpayer and ultimately pays for it anyway. If they paid a living wage, they are still paying for it, so its pretty much a wash.

Companies don't pay taxes, they act merely as an opaque medium through which citizens are taxed without their direct knowledge.

unreasonable ass:It was reported that Walmart should have allowed only $50 to be purchased by any person. Walmart made the decision to not stop people from using the EBT system while it was down. The result is Walmart reportedly isn't being paid for their losses.

I have mixed feelings about this .. on one had, it isn't the kids fault that their parents are trying to loot the stores (did you see the aftermath, it was terrible), but it will be the kids who ultimately suffer.

that being said, if Walmart had told EBT customers "sorry the EBT system is down, no food for you" then we would be reading about how much Walmart hates poor people.

Walmart hates poor people though, so they should have just not let them use the EBT cards, they would be money ahead now.

I haven't seen any articles where Walmart (or other stores) are complaining to pick up the bill (for charges over $50), have you?

lockers:JuicePats: lockers: The punishment for abusing the system is to starve peoples kids. This makes people happy? Meanwhile all those companies who did not follow policy gets a pass? Man you guys are cruel and greedy.

Wal-Mart lost a shiatton of money on the deal.

okay, so yeah, I guess they will finally train their staff better.

unreasonable ass:Smelly Pirate Hooker: Barfmaker: Even though the accepted policy is to allow benefits recipients to purchase $50 worth of groceries in the event that cards malfunction, many stores did not limit purchases.

So the stores got their money but no punishment for them?

Yeah, this. I say they eat the overages, just like they'd do with other forms of fraud that they don't bother to prevent.

Geez .. does nobody read the farking articles

WALMART HAS TO ABSORB THE LOSSES

damnit, I didn't want to yell but shiat .. read a few lines of the article or maybe read the farking comments in this thread

You expect me to read the article? As if. I have LOLcats to chortle at.